YES!! I'm "Generalist". 'Bout time this site got it's stuph together and recognisated my general overall isting. Only me and 18 others have thus far acheived ... this ... thing. I'm beaming with pride: I always thought my ist was pretty specific. Now I'm learnt otherways. Congrats also to those others who are most likely even better moreso isters than meself.

Fun titles. I changed mine on LinkedIn to "Pixel Pushet" in a futile attempt to stop recruiters from bugging me about web development jobs. Haven't done that in years.

"generalist" might be more rffective. Or less. Shrug.

@Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 every motor is an interference motor when a rod lets go.

2

@Ceshion Smoothline's hard tops have gotten pretty good reviews. Styling is subjective, and I'm not sure if they fit the Sky or just the Solstice, but the quality is there. I'm CADing up a model for a hard top for my car, planning to CNC a plug for it in pieces, jigsaw style.

Minor superficial marking is just that. Unimportant. Deep nicks around the circumference create weaknesses. Those would cause problems. Redo.
With the right tools, careful use and a little practice, you will be able to strip insulation without nicking or scratching the copper.
Suitable tools, ...

also, I heard there were some race cars in the 60s and 70s that used rotors to generate downforce, I'm wondering if we'd be able to implement that better now, and I'm trying to work through the basic calculations for whether or not it'd be feasible but I'm having a little bit of trouble determining how to model what downforce would be necessary to counteract a variable size bump at various speeds

I saw a concept, and I wish I remembered the artist, that used a sort of turbine on each of the corners of the car such that downforce could be generated in a fully variable way, and I'm sort of leading up to figuring out if that could feasibly work

I saw about that too, that's a cool idea too but it doesn't allow for variances in each wheel, which I guess is what I'm trying to solve

and also ideally the ability to corner harder than a passive system

but in reality it'd probably be passive+active, not just one or the other, if it does work

basically their concept was a car that handles as well on the road, regardless of speed, as it does on a track

ideas like this are kind of a hobby of mine, like super high concept, probably won't work but just might sort of things, just going through and figuring out if they're more feasible than they look and worth actually prototyping

@DavidLively I'm sort of thinking more in the terms of generating thrust than generating downforce per se, basically having the rotors mounted in the body, the idea being you can get better traction without having to make the suspension extremely low to the ground, thus making it streetable given ordinary roads aren't going to be kind to that nice shiny aero kit half an inch from the surface

that being the difference from other active downforce devices we've seen

@JPhi1618 - Realize while she's still taking some G's, a C130 isn't going to attempt anything like an F18 would take. Also, I don't think there's any problem with it ... I'm sure the Shuttle crews experienced Gs in the realm of an F18 or greater, and there was more than one female on the shuttles.

Yea, those are the two most important. I just ask because those jets can outmaneuver what a human pilot can handle. We're at the edge of what anyone can handle, so I wonder if male/female makes any difference.

She could probably handle Gs a lot better than you or I could. Heck, I started blacking out on a local roller coaster here in VA a few years back. Take a look at the Intimidator 305 ... they had to slow it down because people (yah, me too) were blacking out on it.